Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1887-02-23

manufacturing Establishments IN hich-
mond have to pay their hands so much
hieherprices than are paid to tho work
men in similar foreign establishments
that our establishments must all go
down unless protected, II would seen,
to MS that in such case also protection
is admissible. We have been told that
the steel-works here could not be kept
up at all without protection. The Chi
cago platform provided for this very
contingency. Itstariff resolution reads
as follows:
"The necessary reduction in taxation
can and must be effected without de-
priving American labor OF the ability
to compete successfully with foreign
labor, and without imposing lower rates
of duty than will be ample to cover any
increased cost OF production which may
exist in consequence of tho higher rate
Of wages prevailing in this country
Certainly that resolution speaks OF
protection not only us admissible but as
demanded by the higher wages prevail
ingSn this country. And it does notin
the least matter whether the wages are
actually higher here or not, so far as
the principle involved or this argument
is concerned, seeing that the momept
our wages shall become higher than
those in foreign countries, protection
is declared to be not merely admissible
but indispensable. We are in good
company at any rate.
The question in dispute isin effect,
Would it be wiser and better to pay III
per cent. more for our goods and have
them manufactured at home than to
send 80 per cent. of their cost out OF
the country We said two or three
years ago that it would be better for
Richmond to pay more for her new City
Hall and have it kuilt by our own work
men out of our own stone than to put
il out to contractor and have it done
by Massachusetts workmen out of Mas
sachusetts stone. In the one case,
half million dollars would be
transferred to Massachusetts, whilst
in the other the city would have the
City Hall and also the half-million OF
dollars. A half dozen such contracts
would take from Richmond an amount
of money equal to all her banking cap
ital. Does any man really hold that 1t
makes no difference to our prosperity
whether our money is spent at home or
abroad If l.. H. B. srlrrenders this
point he surrenders his theory. Sup
pose twenty of our rich men, worth ten
millions of dollars, were to come to that
conclusion and decide to take ten mil
lions of dollars from Richmond and
expend il in England 3? Suppose we
send all Virginia retail merchants to
New York for goods? What would be-
come of this city? Why does every
body in every town and city and village
insist that the people should encourage
new industries at home, if we can just
as proftably send our money away from
home to be expended? Why have SO
many towns exempted new manufae-
turing plants from taxation? We in
this country send out of the United
States fifty millions of dollars a year to
Day for coffee. Wouldn't it be better
for us, if we could do it, to pay two
cents a pound more for it and raise our
coffee at home and keep the fifty mil
lions here?
We need not discuss the constitu-
tionality of protection, or whether 1t Is
ultra uires. AS able lawyers are to be
found upon the one as upon the other
side of that question.
To show that there is a fallacy con-
cealed somewhere in the arguments of
our opponents, we will add that if the
money raised by tariff were raised by
direct taxation-that is, upon lands
and houses-it would impoverish the
people. They couldn't pay such a
tax. Virginia would have topay, as the
Constitution provides, according to
population-that is, over six millions a
wear, or two dollars on every hundred
dollars worth of real estate, in addi-
ton to the taxes now paid. In this
city both would amount to $3.50 on
every hundred dollars worth of proper
ty. Necessarily, it would diminish the
value of the property proportionately,
even if such ajax could be collected. 1t
would he an intolerable tax.
We quote L. H. B. S own words, and
tell him that "the Government has a
right to lay its grasp upon any subject
of customs-duties that in its opinion is
right. 1t may exercise the right un-
wisely, but no man can say nay to its
decision" "The Government may as
same it is for revenue, whether ii
brings in any revenue or not. To pro
tcct tobacco and whiskey may be un-
wise, but it can never be iniquitous SC
long as Congress, the legally constituted
body, thinks it necessary.
| The German Elections.